"The continued harassment and detention of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi demonstrates the SPDC’s ambitions to silence Burma’s greatest hope for peace. Daw Suu does not threaten the generals who control Burma. In fact, she is their best hope.
For over 20 years Daw Suu has exhibited an unwavering commitment to non-violence and dialogue with Burma’s military regime. In light of the junta’s repressive behavior, Daw Suu’s moderate voice and calls for national reconciliation are the true beacon of hope for Burma’s people and must not be overlooked.
Political change in Burma is inevitable, as is the transition of power from the generals to a civilian government. A prominent figure of the democracy movement, Daw Suu commends widespread respect from Burma’s citizens, ethnic nationalities, and even within the armed forces. It is this common admiration that places Daw Suu in the unique position to peacefully guide democratic transition addressing the concerns of all parties.
For a peaceful transition to democracy to take place in Burma, the junta must immediately release Daw Suu and engage in a sincere and inclusive dialogue regarding Burma’s political future. The junta must embrace Daw Suu’s calls for “reconciliation and progress towards a situation in which we can all participate together for the good of the future.”"

"Since Burma embarked on its transition from a military government to a nominally civilian-led one in 2010, ‘national reconciliation’ has become a ubiquitous concept amongst its politicians and advocates for peace. The 2010 election was seen as an important opportunity for dialogue and cooperation, as well as a potential catalyst for peace in a country torn apart by more than 60 years of civil war. With the National League for Democracy’s (NLD) historic electoral win in 2015, hope was further renewed for rebuilding Burma into a genuine democracy and uniting its fragmented society....."

"Dramatic reforms in Myanmar in recent years have transformed this long-isolated country into a more
open society, one actively seeking to re-engage with the region and the world. Competitive elections, a
lively parliament, a more vibrant media, and a growing civil society have allowed for debates on a range
of issues concerning the nature of the state and the development agenda that were previously not pos
-
sible. The landslide electoral victory of the opposition National League of Democracy under Aung San
Suu Kyi’s leadership in November 2015 created the potential to deepen the democratic transition..."

"Myanmar's leader has been widely condemned for the Rohingya humanitarian crisis but the blame for abuses more squarely lies with the autonomous military"...By law... Suu Kyi has no power over the wholly autonomous military, which is under the exclusive control of Commander-in-Chief Senior General Min Aung Hlaing. While Suu Kyi was criticized for the ill-treatment of Rohingya even before August this year, Min Aung Hlaing visited Austria and Germany in April, Russia in June, India in July and Japan in August.
On each visit he received a red carpet welcome while the Rohingya crisis, not to mention the wars against Kachin, Palaung and Shan ethnic minority rebels in Myanmar’s north, was apparently never broached..."

"It’s difficult to imagine a more dramatic drop in public stature than the one Aung San Suu Kyi has experienced these past few weeks. No doubt due in large part to the overwhelming sense of betrayal felt by many, the Nobel Laureate has been harshly criticized for her country’s recent treatment of the Rohingya. Words like “Genocide” and “Ethnic Cleansing” have, to my mind, been aptly used to define the situation in Rakhine State. With hundreds dead and hundreds of thousands fleeing across the border to Bangladesh, it’s difficult to imagine a more systematic and purposeful deprivation of life and human rights currently unfolding. In the bloody corpus of human suffering, this chapter should without a doubt serve as the stereotypical example of ethnic cleansing.
To a large extent, the international media agrees with that statement. And yet, though their denunciation of recent events has been forceful, the condemnation of Aung San Suu Kyi has proved a qualified one especially in more analytically minded circles. As it turns out, holding a Nobel prize inclines people, specifically those who consider themselves thoughtful, towards leniency. This is why you’ll hear arguments claiming that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has no good options, that she must appease the military leaders who are truly behind this massacre, that she risks damaging Myanmar’s fledgling democracy with too strong a denunciation of violence, and that the majority Bamar would turn against her should she speak out too strongly in defense of the Rohingya. Suu Kyi’s chief moral failing, by these accounts, is one of inaction. Her silence, rather than any active effort to tangibly harm people, is the main cause for disappointment..."

"Since the National League for Democracy’s landslide November 2015 election victory, discussions of Myanmar’s political future have taken an interesting turn. The NLD—ruling in coalition with military and ethnic political interests—needs to maintain a delicate balance. It cannot afford to alienate the millions of voters who showed it such exuberant support. In practice, this means certain issues are deemed too hot for strong policy action. At the top of that list is the Rohingya conundrum: a political stalemate that has morphed into a catastrophic humanitarian crisis. The NLD is not prepared to risk its support from among Buddhist voters who resent any suggestion that the Rohingya, or other Muslims, deserve equal treatment from state authorities. The military also appears to have determined that any shift in NLD discussion of the topic threatens the red lines around its continued partnership with the elected government.
For a long time, it was possible for activists from around the world, and from inside Myanmar, to project their personal expectations onto a hypothetical NLD government. Aung San Suu Kyi was a convenient symbol of peaceful resistance to military rule. Unsullied by the pragmatics of day to day decision making, her supporters, from near and far, rejoiced in her defiant purity: her Nobel Peace Prize; her years of imprisonment; her sacrifice of self and family; her steely and dignified resolve. The world fell in love with the idea that she could lead a democratic and inclusive country, where justice would prevail, and where a popular mandate would right history’s wrongs.
Unfortunately, in this model, wishful thinking often substitutes for careful analysis of the challenges confronting every Myanmar government, as well as the specific limitations encountered by the NLD. Their coalition with the military is the engine for an evolving compromise about the distribution of power in the country, with the 2008 constitution setting the terms of the army’s continuing dominance of those areas where it perceives its core interests at stake. Nobody in a position of real power, least of all Aung San Suu Kyi, has made any serious move to question the basis of this arrangement. Where the NLD previously proposed constitutional amendments, the focus remained on clearing obstacles to Aung San Suu Kyi’s personal ambitions, rather than to deleting the military’s controlling stake. The footwork required to allow Aung San Suu Kyi’s elevation to the new role of State Counsellor goes to show that the military has few serious concerns about her capacity to challenge their mandate. In fact, they have Aung San Suu Kyi exactly where they want her..."

"Twelve months ago, Aung San Suu Kyi was appointed State Counsellor of Myanmar, becoming the de facto leader of the National League for Democracy (NLD) Government that swept to power in (relatively) free and fair elections in 2015. Over the past several weeks, both the government and Suu Kyi herself have been subject to searching reviews by Myanmar-watchers and other commentators.
To varying degrees, most have expressed disappointment with the NLD's performance during its first year in office. Even allowing for the unrealistically high expectations held both within and outside the country, the new government has failed to deliver on its promises. Foreign observers have been particularly critical of Suu Kyi's repeated refusal to intervene on behalf of the mostly stateless Muslim Rohingyas..."

"It is not surprising that at the end of the first year of the National League for Democracy government of Myanmar, led by State Counselor and party chairperson Aung San Suu Kyi, commentators have been quick to summarize the year negatively. After all, newspapers and blogs are more avidly read if they bring news of fresh disasters, not the mundane, nitty-gritty, of the hard slog of governing. However, in the case of Myanmar there are other causes for the several tales of woe that have emerged in recent days.
The first is that the NLD had no experience of governing before taking power five months after the 2015 elections. Moreover, the NLD is not a political party of the kind we normally think of. It had no articulate and developed set of policy alternatives and no carefully conceived strategies of implementation, nor did it have an ideological drive to give it momentum to govern. Rather, after being suppressed for two decades, it emerged as a disjointed organization with only one goal -- replacing the military government. This it has only partially achieved, thanks to the artful way the army structured the constitution to ensure that it maintained the ability to control the pace of political change.
Second is the lionized position of Suu Kyi..."

"After one year in power, Aung San Suu Kyi has gone all but missing from the public ear. Her voice, long known for inspiring her people, is heard in only a handful of public appearances or daily private meetings with officials and foreign dignitaries, while there is nearly no interaction with the media.
When she does occasionally address a public audience, she repeats abstract concepts such as "national reconciliation," "rule of law" and "peace." But what is even more noticeable in her speeches is a commanding and pedagogical rhetorical style underpinned by a puritanical political ideology. The latter shows a world view that values individual fulfillment of ta-wun (duties or responsibilities) rather than exercise of akwin-ahyeh (rights or entitlements)..."

"The people of Myanmar have always been able to capture complex issues in pithy, often humorous, ways. One joke currently doing the rounds is that, after decades of trying to get into the driver’s seat of the rickety old bus that is modern Myanmar, State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi has discovered that the steering wheel is not connected, the accelerator does not work and the passengers all want to go in different directions.
Aung San Suu Kyi was never going to meet the expectations of her supporters, both in Myanmar and abroad. They were quite unrealistic, given all the problems she inherited on taking power in March. Every sector of government begged for drastic reform and increased resources. Added to that, several new challenges have arisen over the past eight months that have stretched her inexperienced administration almost to breaking point..."

"After two years of delicate accommodation, Myanmars military backed government and the main pro-democracy opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) are on a collusion course ahead of general elections scheduled for next year. An NLD-led campaign launched last month to amend the 2008 constitution is openly challenging the militarys political power and testing political stability ahead of the pivotal polls.
The national drive for charter change aims broadly to accelerate the countrys still tentative transition from decades of authoritarian military rule towards democracy. In particular, the campaign is
geared towards diminishing the role of military appointees to parliament who currently control 25% of its seats. The campaign however is not geared towards changing article 59(f), which bars NLD leader and pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi from assuming the presidency because she was married to a foreign national."

"During the third week of May, Aung San Suu Kyi's supporters gathered for two mass rallies in Rangoon and Mandalay, Burma's two biggest cities. (The demonstration in Mandalay, the most important commercial city in upper Burma, drew an estimated 25,000 supporters.) Both rallies called for amending Article 436 of the 2008 constitution, which essentially gives the military a veto over any amendments. The article stipulates that any amendments require the support of more than 75 percent of members of the parliament, where unelected military representatives control a quarter of the seats. Aung San Suu Kyi's camp have to get rid of this provision before they can amend the article that prevents her from holding the presidency. There's no doubt that Burma's constitution is deeply flawed. The excessive power that it grants the military and the obstacles it places in the way of amendment are only two of the most obvious problems. Ideally, of course, these provisions can be changed or abolished. In reality, matters are a bit more complicated..."

"For many years, we have learned about cryptic events in Burma/Myanmar from rumors. We had hoped that this would change with the elimination of censorship, and there has been much progress. But rumors still abound and decision-making is often still opaque.
According to some reports, Aung San Suu Kyi has said that if the 2008 Myanmar constitution is not changed to allow her to compete for the presidency, her party - the National League for Democracy (NLD) - will boycott the 2015 elections. Others in the party say this is not true. She is currently prohibited from being (indirectly) elected by the Burmese parliament (Hluttaw) for the presidency or vice presidency because family members hold foreign passports..."

Abstract: No living foreigner has shaped contemporary U.S. attitudes toward
a single country more than Aung San Suu Kyi. As the seemingly
vulnerable international avatar of democracy, she has effectively determined
the parameters of possible U.S. policy choices. Although her Burma/Myanmar
specific goals and those of the U.S. overlap, they are not contiguous.
That country is a “boutique” issue in U.S. politics – important but not of the
highest priority. The U.S. will face difficult policy decisions toward Burma/
Myanmar following the formation of the new Burmese administration after
the elections of November 7, 2010.
Manuscript received 9 July 2010; accepted 5 August 2010
Keywords: Burma/Myanmar, United States, policy, house, senate

"Recent events have raised concerns about Aung San Suu Kyi's health -- and questions about how the pro-democracy movement would cope without her...
Let's imagine a situation: Burma without Aung San Suu Kyi. Undoubtedly, the ruling generals would see this as a dream come true. But for the majority of Burmese, it would come as a great disappointment to lose the leader of the country's pro-democracy movement.
Aung San Suu Kyi at her Inya Lake home in 1996
(Photo: Nic Dunlop/Panos)
Suu Kyi may be a prisoner, but she still has immense power. She strikes fear into the hearts of heavily armed men, while giving moral strength to the powerless. She is the hope of the people of Burma, who have struggled to survive under the boot of their military rulers for the past 46 years..."

New biography offers few insights into her thinking but gives a useful overview of her place in present-day Burma...
Justin Wintle’s biography of Burma’s democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi does not really bring the reader into direct contact with the world’s best known prisoner of conscience until the second of its four parts—and the first is by far the longest. Some will say he is guilty of padding, others that it is impossible to make any sense of the intractable mess that is contemporary Burma without an appreciation of the historical context..."

The Irrawaddy asked ethnic leaders how they view Aung San Suu Kyi and her leadership in the country’s almost two-decade long pro-democracy movement...
“We ethnic members have studied her from the very beginning. Having listened to her speech at the Shwedagon rally in 1988 and met with her o­n several occasions, we have come to believe that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is a person, and a leader, who will accept reality.
“But we’ve never expected a political leader who is completely flawless. Since the popular uprising in 1988, there have been weaknesses among politicians who have played a leading role in Burma’s politics—including me. As we have weaknesses, we are still failing to achieve a democratic nation. So, should we blame her alone for the failure? We all are responsible for that.”...
—Aye Thar Aung, secretary of the Arakan League for Democracy party, based in Rangoon; —Shwe Ohn, a leader of the banned United Nationalities League for Democracy, who attended the 1947 Panglong conference, based in Rangoon; —Cin Siang Thang, chairman of the ethnic Zomi National Congress party, based in Rangoon; —Mahn Sha, secretary of Burma’s oldest and strongest rebel group, the Karen National Union

Former UN Special Envoy Razali Ismail sought to negotiate between the opposition party and the military regime from 2000 until 2005. He recalls his meetings with Burma’s most famous prisoner, Aung San Suu Kyi.

While Burma’s generals deny Aung San Suu Kyi’s influence, she still remains a relevant and uniting political force... "
...Suu Kyi is still alive and remains spiritually strong, but the fight for democracy in Burma has not been an easy or happy o­ne. Whatever hope remains is focused o­n her iron resolve in standing true to her principles..."

"When Jim McNalis returns home from his occasional trips to Burma he takes not only memories. Packed away in his suitcase is the very essence of Burma—samples of its soil.
Jim McNalis at work in his Florida studio
Jim, a talented artist and former Walt Disney art director, adds the soil to clay in his Florida studio and fashions sculptures of the Burmese personalities he most admires.
Chief among them is a bust of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
“The first thing I see every morning as I enter my studio is my cast of the sculpture of Aung San Suu Kyi,” he told The Irrawaddy. “She seems to stare reflectively through the window and out over the water, reminding me on a daily basis that there is no such thing as neutrality; that if one person’s freedom is denied, the freedom of all people is in jeopardy.”..."

ICBL Ambassador Jody Williams' trip to this landmine-infested country included a meeting with fellow Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi.
Ms. Jody Williams, 1997 Nobel Peace Laureate, which she received with the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, visited Burma this week, carrying personal messages of support from fellow Nobel Peace laureates Rigobera Menchu Tum, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Dr. Oscar Arias, Joseph Rotblat, Norman Borlaug, Betty Williams, Mairead McGuire, to Burma's country-bound Nobel laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. It was the first visit to Ms. Suu Kyi by another Nobel Peace Laureate since she received the award while under house arrest in 1991.

Timothy Garton Ash reports from Burma, one of the most repressive andisolated states in the world. He finds a country straight out of the pages ofRudyard Kipling-and George Orwell. Shortened version of "Beauty and the Beast in Burma",

Parade Magazine, Cover Story, January 19, 1997..." In the exotic southeast Asian nation of Burma, a country of 46 million people, a battle of wills of heroic proportions is taking place. On one side is a brutal military dictatorship known as SLORC (State Law and Restoration Council). On the other is a slim, 51-year old mother of two named Aung San Suu Kyi, who is leading her people in a nonviolent struggle for democracy..."

"This essay compares the human rights views of two Asians who in their own ways have been influential not only on their own fellow countrypersons but whose influence extend beyond their national borders. It is submitted that both Lee Kuan Yew1, a Singaporean and Aung San Suu Kyi, a Burmese, have made their impact internationally And I further submit that their influence and impact are at least partly due to their ideas though of course, in the case of Lee Kuan Yew his influence is perhaps primarily due to Lee's role in the "miraculous transformation in Singapore's economy while maintaining tight political control over the country ... [resulting in] Singapore's per capita GNP [being] now higher than that of its erstwhile colonizer Great Britain".
The comparison of Aung San Suu Kyi's and Lee's views on human rights and democracy should be of some relevance and interest in the light of increasingly substantial contemporary literature on democratisation and international law..."

"20 July 1995 will mark the sixth anniversary of the detention under
house arrest of prisoner of conscience Aung San Suu Kyi. 11 July 1995
marks the end of Aung San Suu Kyi's period of detention as stipulated
by the laws of the government of Myanmar. Aung San Suu Kyi, winner of
the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991, and leader of the National League for
Democracy (NLD), has been detained by the military government of
Myanmar, the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), for the
peaceful expression of her political views. Amnesty International,
which has called for her immediate and unconditional release since the
beginning of her detention, now requests the SLORC to unconditionally
release Aung San Suu Kyi in accordance with Myanmar law..."